If shareholders are liable for the actions of the companies in which they hold shares in proportion to their holdings, then shareholders will have a vested interest in holding the board of directors accountable. But as it stands, shareholders get all of the benefits of owning stock while the state absorbs the true risk of holding stock.

Once upon a time, the corporate veil may have been necessary. But presently, the insurance industry has matured enough to be able to handle the load if the corporate veil is done away with. If people want to own stock, let's let them pay the real price of investment through either uncovered liabilities or buying their own insurance.

But Netscape is still something of a household word. The brand remains strong even though the browser is effectively dead.

Their unit-based pricing strategy for PC makers is another good example though, most certainly -- is that what you meant by OS/2?


[ Parent ]

Microsoft, owning 90% of the market or more, created Internet Explorer and bundled it with Windows to kill off Netscape.

Do note that the anti-trust suit against Microsoft wasn't solely over the bundling of Internet Explorer, but also over anti-competitive practics such as offering discounts on Windows to OEMs who didn't bundle Netscape's Navigator product.

Also note that, as described in TFA, companies that hold a certain level of monopoly power can be required to act differently than those which don't.

#husi on slashnet.org, and yes you're pretty much right about it.


[ Parent ]